TITLE:
Administrative Environmental Embargoes Based on Remote Sensing and Procedural Safeguards: Between Ecological Protection and Due Process of Law within the Framework of Brazilian Draft Bill No. 2564/2025
AUTHORS:
Deilton Ribeiro Brasil
KEYWORDS:
Remote Sensing, Environmental Embargoes, Due Process of Law, Procedural Safeguards, Ecological Protection, Environmental Enforcement, Environmental Constitutionalism
JOURNAL NAME:
Beijing Law Review,
Vol.17 No.3,
August
31,
2026
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to examine the constitutional and administrative-law implications of Brazilian Draft Bill No. 2564/2025, which proposes to regulate precautionary administrative measures in environmental enforcement and to restrict environmental embargoes based exclusively on remote sensing. The research problem consists in determining whether the requirement of prior notification and the prohibition of embargoes grounded solely on remote detection strengthen procedural safeguards or unduly reduce the effectiveness of ecological protection. The research hypothesis is that, although due process of law and procedural safeguards constitute essential limits on administrative police powers, the proposed restriction may weaken preventive and precautionary environmental governance when interpreted as an obstacle to immediate action against imminent or continuing environmental harm. The research adopts the hypothetico-deductive method. The methodological procedures include documentary analysis of the draft legislation, normative interpretation of Brazilian environmental legislation, and critical examination of the doctrinal debate concerning remote sensing, administrative embargoes, proportionality, precaution, and environmental constitutionalism. The preliminary results indicate that the core issue does not lie in the use of remote sensing as an evidentiary tool, but in the legal definition of the conditions under which precautionary administrative measures may be immediately imposed. The study therefore argues that environmental enforcement must reconcile technological effectiveness, ecological urgency, reasoned administrative decisions, and procedural safeguards, without transforming due process into a barrier to the State’s constitutional duty to prevent environmental degradation.